Compared to students in other U.S. states, California's students tend to score lower. But how does the U.S. education system perform in comparison to other countries?

This lesson explains the measures available to evaluate the success of education systems around the world. The short version is that the strongest results are concentrated in East Asia, U.S. results are weak, and scores have been declining across many countries.

America's results on international tests are ordinary

Two major tests, PISA and TIMSS, compare the learning of students around the world. According to both of them, American students are merely ordinary. Here's how we know.

After World War II, under the Marshall Plan, western nations formed an organization to support development and connection among allied countries. In 1961, the program was renamed the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). Its mission has been to help countries work together to promote global economic growth, trade, and better living standards. Since the year 2000, the OECD has studied the role and effectiveness of education systems worldwide through the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA, pronounced like the name of the leaning tower.)

Every three years, PISA coordinates global tests of 15-year-old students. The results, in reading, science, math, and reasoning, help reveal differences over time and among nations. Historically, the tests have helped individual countries find the political will to take action when their school systems aren't working well. The tests have also helped identify countries with successful systems worth learning from, like Finland, Singapore and Japan.

In 2025, the tests showed something unprecedented: a pattern of falling scores throughout most of the world:

Between 2015 and 2025, average reading scores across OECD countries fell by 28 points — equivalent to about one and a half years of learning — while mathematics scores dropped by 22 points, or just over one year of learning. Science scores declined by seven points over the same period, though they remained relatively stable between 2022 and 2025.

The OECD urges caution in drawing conclusions from PISA results in the U.S. in 2025. Participation rates in the PISA test were well below OECD target. OECD’s analysis could not rule out nonresponse bias or determine which direction any bias might run.

For historical context, it's worth noting that the test was administered at a moment of major organizational disruption at the Department of Education, which the Trump Administration's Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) had marked for elimination or major reorganization.

Based on the reports available, scores in the U.S. fell somewhat less than scores in other nations, particularly in the area of science. But the geographical pattern at the top is striking. Several East Asian education systems posted exceptionally high scores. U.S. students scored above the OECD average in reading and science and close to the OECD average in mathematics, but well below the highest-scoring systems.

Headlines about the 2025 PISA test results served as a kind of Rorschach test. Drawing from the same data, analysts from varying perspectives emphasized different conclusions:

For an excellent overview of the PISA program findings and their significance, watch this presentation by Andreas Schleicher, who has overseen the program since its inception. (Skip the first 17 minutes to get directly to his remarks.)

The four schematic maps below present the 2025 data for each of the subjects tested. Hover or click to learn more. Generally, teal represents scores higher than the U.S. and orange represents scores lower than the U.S.

The Computational Problem Solving portion of the test, newly introduced in 2025, measures how 15-year-old students use digital tools and logical thinking to solve unfamiliar, real-world problems.

How are TIMSS and PISA different? Glad you asked. Broadly, PISA emphasizes skills by asking students questions that require specific abilities. TIMSS, by contrast, emphasizes knowledge by asking questions that measure what students know. Even so, rankings based on these tests tend to align more than they differ.

How important are the PISA and TIMSS tests?

TIMSS is run by the ⁠International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement (IEA), separate from the OECD. Unlike PISA, it tests 4th- and 8th-graders in mathematics and science, and it is designed to align with what participating countries expect students to learn in school. In TIMSS 2023, U.S. fourth-graders scored above the international average in both math and science, as did U.S. eighth-graders. But U.S. performance had deteriorated: fourth-grade math fell 18 points from 2019 to 2023, while eighth-grade math fell 27 points. Eighth-grade math was also significantly below its 1995 level.

The two tests provide an independent check on each other. In TIMSS 2023, U.S. students still scored above the international average in both math and science, but math performance fell sharply from 2019: by 18 points in fourth grade and 27 points in eighth grade. Different international tests therefore tell somewhat different stories about America’s relative standing, but both show reason for concern about recent trends in mathematics.

All over the world, brilliant people are working to make their schools great. By comparing school systems, researchers hope to find useful differences. Here are some major findings:

For a classic dive into international comparisons of education systems, read What America Can Learn about Smart Schools in Other Countries by Amanda Ripley.

Not everyone agrees about the importance of PISA scores. Among the skeptics is Diane Ravitch, an education activist and historian:

Some policy experts such as Martin Carnoy of the Stanford Graduate School of Education have argued that comparisons among states are more relevant than comparisons with other countries. (This argument should provide no comfort to Californians, as discussed in Ed100 Lesson 1.1.)

Want to improve America’s future economy? Make education work better, for lots of kids.

Education benefits everyone, not just Americans. There's nothing wrong with kids in other countries doing well in school. But the scores are not just of theoretical interest.

Education drives economic growth

Education and economic well-being are connected. In places where kids are widely well-educated, economies thrive. The PISA test has played an important role in proving that educational achievement drives economic growth. In a 2010 study of educational attainment and national growth rates, revised in 2015 under the title Universal Basic Skills: What Countries Stand to Gain, Stanford professor Eric Hanushek and colleagues found that educational success in a country (as measured by the PISA exam) powerfully predicts future economic growth.

The implication is clear: Want to make America's future economy better? Make education work better, for lots of kids. If an investment enables kids to learn more successfully, in a way that can be confirmed by scores on the PISA exam, this analysis suggests that it makes sense to invest boldly. Investment in education can eventually pay for itself many times over, as professors Eric Hanushek and Ludger Woessmann write, “The overwhelming conclusion is that the magnitude of the impact of knowledge capital on growth appears to be so large that nations cannot afford to neglect the quality of their schools. Doing so would impair their economic future.”

Students in developing nations are learning, too

Educational attainment has risen dramatically around the world. One consequence is a profound change in the global distribution of highly educated people.

In 1950, the United States had far more adults with postsecondary education than either China or India. That advantage has disappeared as populations have grown and access to education has expanded. The Wittgenstein Centre estimates that China now has substantially more postsecondary-educated adults than the U.S.; under its “middle of the road” demographic and education scenario, both China and India will pull much further ahead by 2050. These numbers measure the size of the educated population, not the quality of education each person received.

Historically, outstanding universities have been a source of America's economic strength. For decades, they have been part of the reason why some of the world's brightest young people have wanted to come to America's colleges, despite the high tuition costs. To be clear, China's universities educate far more students than America's do, and some of the top universities offer an excellent education, too — at a fraction of the price. In the long run, America’s leadership in excellent quality higher education will inevitably face increasing competition. In 2025 the Trump administration accelerated this trend by withholding student visas from some Chinese students. New international enrollment at U.S. colleges fell 17% in fall 2025 among institutions responding to an Institute of International Education survey; among institutions reporting declines, 96% cited concerns about the visa application process. College recruiters around the world rejoiced at the opportunity.

China and India both educate far more students than America does at every level - including college.

In a knowledge economy, top talent drives growth. America’s longstanding position as the global leader in higher education is not fated to last forever. As centers of excellent education and research grow in colleges around the world, travel for education will become less of a one-way flow. Seeking opportunity, adventure, and affordable education, American students will choose to attend research universities in China and India.

The second Trump administration also disrupted two longstanding sources of strength for U.S. universities: federal support for research and the flow of international students and scholars. Research grants were terminated or reduced, while visa restrictions and processing changes contributed to uncertainty for international students. In a post for CNN in 2025, Fareed Zakaria described these policies as much more destructive than the administration's inconsistent tariffs:

The next lesson examines the strong connection between successful education and a successful economy. The nature of work has changed.

This lesson was updated in September 2026.